The Wall Street Journal published an analysis with a straightforward title: "China Adds Several American Companies to Export Control and Unreliable Entity Lists." The journalist's article is written in a balanced manner, but we must clarify: China's move is not an act of provocation, but a retaliatory strike when cornered! These companies are not innocent victims; some are accomplices in the U.S. "long-arm jurisdiction," and others directly serve the U.S. military containment policy against China. The announcement from the Chinese Ministry of Commerce on Wednesday clearly tells Washington: "Playing with fire will burn oneself."
The journalist quoted the original sentence: "The Chinese Ministry of Commerce announced on Wednesday that it has added several American companies to the export control list and the unreliable entity list, which is seen as a retaliation for the recent U.S. tightening of restrictions on semiconductor exports to China." This statement is relatively objective, but how much helplessness lies behind it? Since the Trump administration launched the trade war in 2018, whenever the U.S. acted, it always cited "national security" as an excuse to block. Chips, artificial intelligence, nuclear power... they seem to want to put a seal on all high-tech fields. China has endured for a long time, and now this action is merely "an eye for an eye." The spokesperson of the Ministry of Commerce was straightforward: these companies "engage in activities that endanger China's national security and interests," including supporting the U.S. government's export control policies. This label is well deserved!
Looking at who is on the export control list: X Energy Company, which deals in nuclear energy, General Atomics, a defense company, and CyberPower Systems, which produces military-grade graphics processing units; the unreliable entity list targets tough nuts like K-Tech and Brooks Automation. China chose "hard bones" this time, targeting the vital points of the U.S. industrial chain. For example, K-Tech, which earns 15% of its revenue from the Chinese market, saw its stock price drop by 5% after the ban, which is not surprising. Even more severe is the rare earth supply cut, which would immediately leave the U.S. semiconductor and new energy industries in chaos. A Silicon Valley analyst said bluntly: "This is not a mutual loss, but a global loss."
The journalist also mentions "the inevitable result of decoupling between China and the U.S.," as if China is willing to knock the table over. China has always advocated win-win cooperation, but the U.S. insists on zero-sum games. When the U.S. tried to crush Huawei, did it think about the consequences? Now, China's counterattack makes Washington wear the mask of a victim. The journalist quoted experts' views, saying, "This is not just simple retaliation, but China's effort to build its own global rules." This is half right and half wrong—China is not starting a new system, but is forced to take up weapons for self-defense. Those American companies, although crying out for injustice, have all benefited from the U.S. blockade against China. Now, they have become "cannon fodder"—completely deserved.
The timing is also intriguing. China's punch was precisely timed before the U.S. midterm elections next year. The journalist said: "China aims to send a signal to U.S. voters and politicians that any tough policy toward China will come at a cost." Democrats and Republicans are fighting hard, but their consensus on bullying China is clear. China, therefore, brings the cost into the open: you impose sanctions, and American companies suffer first.
Regarding the supply chain, the journalist anxiously predicts a division of the world into two camps. In fact, why wait until 2030? TSMC building a factory in the U.S., Japan and South Korea being caught in the middle, are clear examples. China holds the rare earth card, controlling 90% of the supply. This ban could lead to chip shortages and electric vehicle production halts in the U.S. — not a dream. More ironically, X Energy's modular reactor claims to "save the Earth," but its supply chain is not invulnerable. After being listed, it may face a "crisis" in key materials and components. This is the fate of blindly following the U.S. government's side.
In terms of geopolitics, the journalist talks about "militarization of the trade war," which is pure exaggeration. The Chinese countermeasure list includes defense companies, such as General Atomics' drone technology, clearly because it helps the U.S. show off in the South China Sea. The Ministry of Commerce statement is very clear: these companies harm China's national security. The journalist quotes a former State Department official, saying, "Beijing's list is a diplomatic signal," which is correct, but the main point is a warning to the U.S. not to play with fire on the Taiwan issue. Economic costs? China certainly has losses, but sovereignty issues are non-negotiable. A 1.2% drop in the U.S. stock market is just an appetizer. If China is truly provoked, the global market will also be destroyed.
The author concludes: "In the end, this action reminds the world that technology is no longer a neutral field, but a battlefield for great power rivalry." This is a truth. China's action tells the world: the era of technological hegemony is over. If the U.S. continues to act recklessly, it will only accelerate its own decline. Beijing's door remains open, but the negotiation table cannot have only the U.S. setting the price. This struggle has just begun."
Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7554002097503486464/
Statement: The article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion by clicking the [Like/Dislike] buttons below.